RobertZ

Another factor for ChatGPT is ‘quality in quality out.’ If you just as a question like, tell me about meditation’, you’ll get a predictive sequence of words based on the information with ChatGPT has been trained. However, you can also feed ChatGPT information, templates, and models. That is what people do when they ask for corrections or shorter versions of computer code. For example, ‘here is a 2000 word essay. I’m going to ask you to write an outline for a similar document. Do you understand? yes, I understand. ‘For this outline, I will also want you to include my values, which are aaa, bbb, and xxx which defined as Yyy. Do you understand? yes. please write the outline, the essay, [different topic] another example is ‘write a cover letter for this job description (past) using my resume (paste). - now rewrite this cover letter incorporating key element of the mission, vision, and values [from business website], and make the cover letter more succinct. anither example is, “here are two versions of a contract. Explain the differences in rights and obligations… another example is, So it can increase productivity through prompts like, ‘ write this email in succinct business style: “John, get XYZ done. Thank you.’ but you can also feed ChatGPT the information you want to use and instruct it to provide certain kinds of output I think you can have about 4000 words in a question to ChatGPT.

He followed the spiritual path for many years. With respect, it sound like he has a different perspective than you—or at least a different emphasis. I hate to raise a cliche, but is it possible that this difference of perspective became a “Christmas debate” because he is a family member? I can’t wade into that territory, but it seems to me pretty cool that your family would bother debating an issue—as opposed to simply fighting or pacifying one another. Seems to me like you are characterizing the debate as a stage blue versus stage yellow—moral choice versus understanding. This brings to my mind the fact that yellow is built on healthy blue developed. There are probably logical reasons why your uncle is emphasizes, ‘it boils down to choice.’ Maybe a debate is the best forum to explore his perspective. Personally, I’m a fan of small talk at family gatherings. If people want to reach out to me and discuss topics further, that’s fine. I find parties—like Christmas family parties—a better chance to just make people feel welcome. But it’s pretty cool that you discussed some deeper topics . Merry Christmas.

I can’t give you a top three—just three that come to mind immediately 5 Methoxy Dimethyltryptamine because it gave me perspective on what’s interesting to me. Learning diverse perspectives in thinking for oneself For the caution of academia, consider epistemology.

Hi @at_anchor. My name is Robert. I’m from Canada. In your post, you said that you are living in a hostile environment. You also talked about destroying ‘them’ though some kind of power—like the police or using evidence [at law]—but that’s not very hopeful. However [people] are scaring you, demonizing you, and betraying you; while you are vulnerable and dependent. I can only share a bit about my story, and what helped me. Personally, I focused on my basic needs—safety, health, belonging and self-respect. This focus helped me a lot in hostile environments, over time. My experiences were not family, but 2 toxic work places. After university, I found myself at a very toxic and abusive job—I was financially dependent and vulnerable for some unique reasons. I had a sociopathic boss who saw me as a puzzle to pick apart. I had to work quite a few 36-hour days. Visiting the hospital for heart pain. I got much lower than minimum wage at that job—well, I had to go through vitriol to get out of that servitude—it was one of these hell holes. A lawyer helped me get our It took me well over a year to recover from the shock of that experience While recovering, I made an excellent decision: to focus on my basic needs. Simple things, like eating rice and butter (healthy food I could afford) and exercise, and trying to make the people around me feel welcome. Forget about improving my skills. Just basic stuff Then I got a better job digging a trench (hard labor)—which was totally fine with me because I got along well with my coworkers. All I want is to work in peace. But then we all got subbed out to a company that my employer hired—so we ended up working directly under a few bullies (who were abusive). All my coworkers quit—but I stayed. All I can say about having to be around people who are abusive—can be oppressive. I took a few notes to help myself psychologically (date, hour, and minute and basic facts, nothing fancy or long). Notes like this: - January 9, 2021, 9:20 I set down the table an inch from the other table. Colton shouts, ‘Why the FUCK did you put it there, instead of closer?!’ - January 10, 2021 3:35 pm, Colton said: ‘Great, great—just like sex with a 10 year old girl.’ Toxic environments can get overwhelming, oppressive, and difficult to think about, or explain. Some brief factual notes might help promote a safe environment through the ups and downs, and clarify issues like gaslighting. Later, I got a truly excellent job with a safe and positive with environment. To me, it’s health/safety First (including psychological safety). Then belonging. Then self-respect. Then all the other stuff. Take care.

It’s a good reminder. I’ll try skimming the chapter and conceptualizing the contents first. I suppose a chapter summarization would help me to remember what I read and get more out of it (instead of forgetting most everything). However, then there is still something to be said for the habit of reading. The thought, ‘I can only read if I summarize’ might deter me from reading.

I would not dispute the position. I might ask about the data points though. Fiction, or ‘something the imagination invents’ could apply broadly. For example, an imagination could invent money or property interests. At what point does more money yield an incrementally lower rate of goods or services per unit of labour?

Digital information has various drawbacks. The battery one one of my computers exploded. It got old and cold. Lost all my notes. Thousands of photos on a physical hard drive corrupted. Old physical hardware required transfer and update—a convenient service like renting online storage seems to last longer as hard and software updates. Digital information requires more upkeep than physical photos, books, and notes. But digital info can duplicate to new hardware/software with ongoing attention (or a digital storage service). Yeah—who reads end-user licenses? The idea of physical property does seem a bit more intuitive than licenses. Property interests can be quite convoluted —like social defence of property over time.

I intentionally take 200 grams of dextrose when I lift weights to spike my insulin when my muscles are more sensitive than other tissues (like fat). Sugar cravings satisfied.

One challenge for epistemology is in its application. Theory considers possibilities but application introduces further information. For example, Agrippa’s Trilema explores foundationalism, coherence, and infinite regression as justifications of knowledge. In application, how to discuss with a coherent but criteria-critical conspiracy theorist? Then there are analytical tool like defeater analyses. Again—how to apply these tools to justify what I do/don’t know in my daily life? What questions should I ask in ambiguous situations? I also find identifying the contextual salience or logical relevance of claims to be difficult in practice. (Contextual salience concludes that statement 1 is false but a logical relevancy concludes that statement 3 is false: 1. Sam knows his class begins at 1:00. 2. If Sam knows that his class begins at 1:00 then he also knows that his teacher did not cancel class. 3. Sam does not know that his teacher did not cancel class.) Salience vs relevance is easier in theory. For example, if Sam knows that his class starts at 1:00, then he also knows that an evil demon is not misleading him to falsely experience his class starting at 1:00. Therefore, Sam does not know that his class starts at 1:00 (contextualist)—or the demon is irrelevant. But distinguishing logical relevance from contextual salience is difficult in practice.

There is a similar passage about the eternal recurrence in Thus Spoke Zarathustra. There is an image of a dwarf weighing down Zarathustra’s final climb—guilt and shame. The image of the young man with the snake biting fast the inside of his throat can laugh as no one has ever laughed once he follows Zarathustra’s advice: “Bite! Bite!” ‘Change your values and case of guilt and shame before it is too late—then you can laugh at Eternal Recurrence.’

Wanna with kids is not the opposite of Wanda without kids but with kids has without kids as a possibility [a the same universe—not creating another many universe. I like the idea of many universes in different space times; but the idea also seems to be non-falsifiable and based on many inferences.

“Next, Dr Kagan plans to test the impact alcohol has on the mini-brain's ability to play Pong.” Lol. Pretty cool.

Lord Denning. Oldie but goodie—‘loved by all’—a good sign that he understood a broad range of human needs.

I studied Latin for 1 year and here are my comments: 1) Latin grammar can teach the principles of the grammar that other languages use (such as Spanish or Portuguese), compared to English—at least familiarize a person with the concepts of Latin family grammar. For example, English relies more heavily on the order of certain sentence parts than Latin to show the relationship between the words. In English, a person might say, “I give the ball to you,” or “I give you the ball”. In Latin (but not English) the order, ‘The ball gives I to you’ could have the same meaning. Therefore, studying Latin improved my English grammar by identifying the significance of the order of certain sentence parts. 2) Many words in Latin were quite easy for me to remember, as an English speaker. Many Latin words sound similar to a similar-meaning English words. For example, the Latin word for ‘danger’ sounds like the English word ‘precarious.’ Time sounds like temporary. Mercy sounds like misery, and so on. Personally, I find the pronunciation of Latin sounds very similar to English words in pronunciation—so I found it easier to remember Latin words than French or Spanish words personally. I studied Spanish for a year but remember much more from Latin than Spanish. I can never remember French words because the pronunciation is different than English or Latin; but I never studied French. 3) Latin is of course less useful than a living language—Similar to Hebrew or Greek in that respect, I suppose. The study of old languages might be useful in reviewing old texts that survived the test of time. But It is also more difficult to learn a language well if you cannot live in a place where people speak the language. Besides the academic study of texts—Unless perhaps you are taking a licentiate degree at the Vatican to become an exorcist, formator, or bishop—you probably won’t be speaking much Latin to people. Maybe liturgy—but that’s about it for speaking Latin. 4) One enjoyable part of studying Latin is discovering the sheer quantity of colloquial expressions commonly used in modern English that are literal word-for-word translations of ancient Latin texts.